I think you need to shorten your game description. You don't need so much information there. You'll get far more action if people can read a short two or three paragraphs and figure out the theme and BASIC mechanics of the game. Those who are interested can go to the rulebook for more info.

I'm asking because the guidelines specifically state:When is a game ready for entry in the database?For self-published games and user-designer efforts, a game is ready to be added to the BGG database after the game has undergone play-testing and is available in its final form. If details about the game are still being resolved and the rules are still being changed over the course of the play-testing, the game is not sufficiently finalized for a BGG entry.

Yet in your public service announcement you are asking for 'blind play-testing' and mentioning the lack of flowery text and artwork - which to me indicates that is not available in it's final form - but is still in a prototype phase. Especially since the possibility of some rule changes seems possible/likely.

The reason why I ask is because I am designing a game that is in it's final prototype stages and have already been asked if there is a BGG entry on it (to which I respond no, because it doesn't qualify yet as it is not in it's final form).

as Todd mentioned, the description falls under the category "too long, didn't read". Also: You don't offer any "eyecandy" such as e.g. a picture of your game and there is a complete lack of files - where do I get the rules? Or the game components?

@Val:

Though the guidelines are pretty clear, but every once in a while a prototype gets through. My Postcard Dungeon Crawl made it two years ago - and it is still not finished (2 years later! My bad .. no time / too many other things around )

Though the guidelines are pretty clear, but every once in a while a prototype gets through. My Postcard Dungeon Crawl made it two years ago - and it is still not finished (2 years later! My bad .. no time / too many other things around )

Thanks for the response Kai - I think your game is more polished than this one though - and it was two years ago - there's much more games out there now (and many more hobby designers) then there was then and I figured BGG would be better at ensuring games conformed to their guidelines. I think crowd funding has probably had something to do with this and it's certainly giving rise to more people designing their own games.

Again, not to say anything negative about Ka-pow! - I haven't tried it out (or seen rules or anything of the sort) so I can't really comment on how ready/good/bad the game is - it just looks like the designer skipped a few steps somehow. Like you said though, it could be that a prototype slipped through.

I wish both of you luck and I hope your games see the light of many a FLGS shelf and game table!

I think you need to shorten your game description. You don't need so much information there. You'll get far more action if people can read a short two or three paragraphs and figure out the theme and BASIC mechanics of the game. Those who are interested can go to the rulebook for more info.

We did submit a shorter quote for the game but it got referred back to us as being too short. So we submitted the longer version

as Todd mentioned, the description falls under the category "too long, didn't read". Also: You don't offer any "eyecandy" such as e.g. a picture of your game and there is a complete lack of files - where do I get the rules? Or the game components?

Hi Kai,

All the files have been submitted - they're waiting on moderator approval. Hopefully they will appear in the next days or so.

We'll also be looking to get some pictures up soon, but as i'm sure you can appreciate this all takes time and it 's only day 2.

I'm asking because the guidelines specifically state:When is a game ready for entry in the database?For self-published games and user-designer efforts, a game is ready to be added to the BGG database after the game has undergone play-testing and is available in its final form. If details about the game are still being resolved and the rules are still being changed over the course of the play-testing, the game is not sufficiently finalized for a BGG entry.

Yet in your public service announcement you are asking for 'blind play-testing' and mentioning the lack of flowery text and artwork - which to me indicates that is not available in it's final form - but is still in a prototype phase. Especially since the possibility of some rule changes seems possible/likely.

The reason why I ask is because I am designing a game that is in it's final prototype stages and have already been asked if there is a BGG entry on it (to which I respond no, because it doesn't qualify yet as it is not in it's final form).

Am I the one who misunderstood the guidelines?

Hi Val,

You don't come across as rude Clarity is a wonderful thing - and I guess in my excitement I wasn't too clear.

For Richard and I the game is finished. We're after some feedback on how clear the rules are written, though not the rules per-say. I mentioned the card combos because there are a lot. And although they have gone through extensive play testing we might not have spotted all the various ways to manipulate them that people that are not us or our play testers might come up with. And of course we're always open to thoughts, feedback, praise and criticism.

Regarding the components - I wanted to convey that as a print and play version this is simple stuff. We aren't graphic designers, etc. Maybe a second edition in the future will have better components.

You don't come across as rude Clarity is a wonderful thing - and I guess in my excitement I wasn't too clear.

For Richard and I the game is finished. We're after some feedback on how clear the rules are written, though not the rules per-say. I mentioned the card combos because there are a lot. And although they have gone through extensive play testing we might not have spotted all the various ways to manipulate them that people that are not us or our play testers might come up with. And of course we're always open to thoughts, feedback, praise and criticism.

Regarding the components - I wanted to convey that as a print and play version this is simple stuff. We aren't graphic designers, etc. Maybe a second edition in the future will have better components.

Thanks for the response, Tom. As I said, I'm going step-by-step through the process myself - so the clarity you've given me is very helpful. I'm glad you took my comments in the way it was intended. Intentions can be tough to communicate in a forum.